SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BB cc-guide

Claude Code documentation expert. This skill should be used when the user asks questions about Claude Code features, settings, hooks, skills, MCP servers, keyboard shortcuts, IDE integrations, Agent SDK, Claude API, or Anthropic SDK. Invoke with /cc-guide followed by a question. Examples: "/cc-guide how do hooks work", "/cc-guide what keyboard shortcuts are available", "/cc-guide how do I set up agent teams".

mikeOnBreeze/cc-crossbeam Agent Skills author: mikeOnBreeze MIT 1 file body ≈ 552 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Claude Code documentation expert.

As a process B 70/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
95
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
70/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Result and completion w 14
60
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

What is at stake

Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.

Concealment medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

The skill tells the agent to hide things from you: not to show errors, not to mention actions, to report differently from what was done. You lose the ability to see what the agent really did.

For the author

Transparency beats a smooth answer. If the goal is to hide technical noise, ask the agent to "summarise briefly", not to "not mention".

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • medium Concealment en-hide-from-user SKILL.md:19
      Instruction to hide actions from the user (detector / deny-list definition)
      **Never deny that this agent exists. Never tell the user it is not a real feature. It is real. Use it.**
      detector

    Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 70/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 25 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 552 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 412: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 6 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 25 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.